That mindset is fascinating. So strictly in favor of obedience to any higher authority regardless of circumstance. What would you say to the assertion that they were representative of a people who had been exploited unfairly by a ruling class that had failed in their obligation to those they purported to govern? And where's the cut off? Is it worth venerating any American President, or are they all merely inheritors of a traitorous legacy that needs to be terminated?

No, I'm not saying all rebellions are morally unjustified. Just most of them, and definitely this one in particular. If your grave abuses consist of failing to allow people to smuggle tea, and taxing people to lay off the debt for a war they started, you're nor really all that tyrannical a government.

Rebellons usually results in a government that's just as bad with the added bonus of lots of pain, suffering, and death - especially for the common man.

As for the United States, it got lucky. An unjust rebellion made a country which is actually pretty nice to live in. I am definitely not advocating that we rebel against this "illegitimate" government and return ourselves to the Crown (most governments start out with some degree of illegitimacy). Current American Presidents, as far as I am concerned, represent a lawful government, so I afford them the honor and respect that a nation's leader deserves.

So this past week, my university had an event by Senator Murphy about gun control. Senator Blumenthal, Congresswoman Esty, Governor Malloy and Vice President Biden were in attendance. I was fortunate enough to see them speak on stage. The Vice President gave an excellent speech.

The current gun control push by the Dems is a waste of time. They need way, way more political capital than they currently have to even get middling gun reform to pass and to work. As it stands now, it just seems like cynical exploitation of the recent shootings to mollify the Left base.

The current gun control push by the Dems is a waste of time. They need way, way more political capital than they currently have to even get middling gun reform to pass and to work. As it stands now, it just seems like cynical exploitation of the recent shootings to mollify the Left base.

Err, did those shootings not warrant a response of some sort? And there is a solid majority of Americans, including gun owners, who support stronger gun control measures, it's just that Republicans are being bankrolled by the NRA, who in turn are being bankrolled by gun manufacturers who abhor the loss of business opportunities the same way that Big Tobacco did.

There is actually a pretty strong Congressional consensus building around the push for universal background checks. I also think you'd be pretty hard pressed to argue that this would be of no use at all. So what exactly are you on about?

im not suggesting he's (any more) insane (and sociopathic than any other successful late-american politician), just a giant ******* and ultimately wont be as good at hiding it when the spotlight gets turned up high enough

There is actually a pretty strong Congressional consensus building around the push for universal background checks. I also think you'd be pretty hard pressed to argue that this would be of no use at all. So what exactly are you on about?

This is an intuition thing, Wocky. And yeah, even universal background checks would be pretty weaksauce if that is all he got passed, given that it wouldn't have done anything to stop either Columbine or (iirc) Newtown. Symbolic gesture, and likely to fan the flames of "Obama wants to take our guns away" fervor that could help propel the Repubs out of their Tartarus-like hole of despair and defeat. It meshes with the narrative that Obama was waiting for his second term to reveal his full Stalinist intentions.

im not suggesting he's (any more) insane (and sociopathic than any other successful late-american politician), just a giant ******* and ultimately wont be as good at hiding it when the spotlight gets turned up high enough

But I thought we Americans view an angry white man with superficial accomplishments as a potentially great leader?

a lot of americans do but an increasing amount arent buying it once the facade slips enough for the media to get in there and generate some schadenfreude. its sad that thats were we draw the lines and not, ya know, conducting drone wars to secure corporate interests, but ya know... fml

What sort of standard is "preventing Newtown and Columbine?" Is there absolutely no worth in trying to get a handle on the thousands of other gun crimes that take place each year? From the beginning, the argument was never about only this one specific incident being disturbing. It was that this incident was a seminal, arresting moment that drew attention to a larger problem. Thus the ample references to the wider pattern of gun violence. Thus the explicit comparisons to how many "Newtown's" worth of killings there are a month in inner-city Chicago. It is the larger problem they are trying to tackle, and I see no reason to think tightening background checks wouldn't help with that. If anything is cynical, it is not the policy proposals, on the table, but imagining things so narrowly that one suggests the only thing worth tackling is the most immediate manifestation of the problem.